Windy City Media Group Frontpage News

THE VOICE OF CHICAGO'S GAY, LESBIAN, BI, TRANS AND QUEER COMMUNITY SINCE 1985

home search facebook twitter join
Gay News Sponsor Windy City Times 2023-12-13
DOWNLOAD ISSUE
Donate

Sponsor
Sponsor
Sponsor

  WINDY CITY TIMES

Views: Thank Bush
by Mubarak Dahir
2004-07-28

This article shared 2449 times since Wed Jul 28, 2004
facebook twitter google +1 reddit email


Everyone knew going into the vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment that the proposition was a loser. From the standpoint of pure votes, anyway.

No one, not even the most rabid conservative Republican legislators, believed that the amendment had a snowball's chance in hell of passing. And indeed, it didn't.

Still, conventional wisdom said the vote was going to be a political plus for the president. In the political establishment, it was seen as a bone the president could throw to the right-wingers to bolster his conservative credentials with them.

In addition, the president and his Republican strategists figured it would put the Democratic challengers, Senators John Kerry and John Edwards, in an uncomfortable position, as they would have to explain to voters why they opposed the amendment if, as they both say, they oppose marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

Finally, conventional wisdom figured Bush could also use the FMA, and the fact that it failed, in the presidential campaign. No doubt Bush planned to point to the effort and tell voters that it was the Democrats' fault the thing never passed. He would paint the Democrats and their presidential nominee as a bunch of lefty liberals who are out of step and out of sync with mainstream America, which he believes is opposed to equal marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

At least, that was the conventional wisdom.

The problem with conventional wisdom, of course, is that it is so often wrong. So was the case with the assumptions by the Republican taskmasters on the federal marriage amendment.

Instead of making Bush look like a hero of 'traditional American values,' and painting the Democrats as ridiculous left-wing Commies, or putting John Kerry and John Edwards in the uncomfortable political spotlight, the move on the FMA split the Republican party, irritated 'mainstream' American voters and made Bush and his minions look a little silly, if not downright mean-spirited.

If the proposed amendment had ever made it to the floor of the Senate, it would have taken 67 votes to approve it and move it along the arduous process of becoming part of the Constitution.

But the pro-amendment forces couldn't even muster the necessary 60 votes they needed on a procedural issue to get the proposal to the floor. In fact, the final vote of 50 to 48 was embarrassing to the Republicans and to the White House.

Indeed, the whole amendment issue made quite a few Republican Senators more than a little uncomfortable.

Six Republicans openly defied their party and helped block the measure. Political analysts say that number doesn't even begin to reflect the amount of division in the Republican party, as many senators who are opposed to an amendment agreed to support their party's leaders on the initial procedural vote, knowing in advance it would fail and they wouldn't have to really make a stand.

Many Republican senators in close-call elections this fall reportedly resent the forced vote. They rightly reckon that the most conservative voters are also the strongest supporters of the FMA. But swing voters—those highly coveted moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats—are the ones who would be more likely to be turned off by the gesture of voting on the amendment.

There was even a public split in the vice-presidential position on the subject. While Dick Cheney did the dutiful thing and publicly said he supported the president's position, news stations repeatedly ran footage of Cheney's comments during the 2000 presidential campaign, where he clearly said that he thought everyone should be left alone to make whatever relationships they chose, and that at any rate the states, not the federal government, should regulate such personal matters.

And just days before the Senate took up the measure, Lynne Cheney strategically expressed to the press her sentiment that the federal government shouldn't be in the marriage-amendment business. Of course, the well-known fact that the Cheneys have a lesbian daughter, Mary, left little doubt in most people's minds where the vice-presidential family's heart was on the amendment, regardless of the loyalty posturing by the vice president.

Meanwhile, if you are to believe public opinion polls and letters to editors and newspaper editorials all around the country, most 'mainstream' Americans seem perturbed at best with the whole game-show like atmosphere surrounding the charade of the vote.

This national irritation at the staging of a vote on the amendment has little to do with whether or not a majority of Americans agree with such an amendment. (Most polls do show, however, that while a majority of Americans may still oppose marriage rights for same-sex couples, most also oppose enshrining that discrimination into the Constitution.)

Many voters, it seems, are rightly aggravated that the president and the Senate would waste precious time and energy on an issue whose outcome is already pre-ordained. Regardless of their opinions on the amendment or on their party affiliation, a lot of Americans simply saw right through the ploy as politicking at its worst.

A lot of people were rightly asking: What, we have nothing else more important to spend our time and energy on than an amendment we know is doomed to fail?

Ask the average Joe what's on his mind during this election year, and I doubt many would place homosexual nuptials before the war in Iraq, or worries over such things as the economy and jobs and inflation and education and healthcare.

Finally, Bush's notion that forcing a vote on the FMA would put his Democratic opponents, John Kerry and John Edwards—both senators—on the spot failed miserably. The two Johns were cleverly absent from the Senate that day, and the truth is, they didn't need to be there. They knew the amendment was going nowhere, and they also knew that being on the Hill that day was a no-win situation. They deftly expressed their opposition to same-sex marriage and their opposition to the amendment to ban same-sex marriage, while avoiding both the avalanche of reporter's questions and TV news cameras.

As odd as it sounds to say out loud, we as gay and lesbian people should probably be glad that Bush and his advisers made the big mistake they did in focusing so much of a spotlight on such a losing proposition.


This article shared 2449 times since Wed Jul 28, 2004
facebook twitter google +1 reddit email

Out and Aging
Presented By

  ARTICLES YOU MIGHT LIKE

Gay News

VIEWPOINT Meditation on the killing of journalists 2024-04-11
- Trigger warning: I am a journalist and I read newspapers. I've been reading newspapers since I first learned to read. Newspapers were a lively part of the daily life in my family. I even wrote letters ...


Gay News

VIEWS Mike Johnson: The smiling face of Christian tyranny 2024-02-14
- Mike Johnson wants to rewrite the constitution to make the United States a Christian nation. James Michael Johnson, Republican from Louisiana's Fourth District, is the 56th speaker of the United States House of Representatives. He was ...


Gay News

VIEWS Parents, not legislators, should be making decisions about medical options for children 2024-02-06
By Jeffery M. Leving - No matter the medical issue, when it comes to kids, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine said something last December that every lawmaker in the country should realize when it comes to medical decisions for children. "Were House ...


Gay News

SHOWBIZ Sundance items, Green Day, 'Wednesday,' Queerties, 'The Wiz' 2024-01-26
- At the Sundance Film Festival, Jodie Foster told Variety that the $1.4-billion success of Barbie helps confirm that Hollywood no longer views women directors as too much of a risk. She said, "With a big success ...


Gay News

VIEWS Is the Pope Catholic? Francis faces opposition in steps toward LGBTQ+ inclusivity 2024-01-02
- The recent change in Vatican policy allowing priests to bless same-gender couples has provoked an unprecedented backlash against Pope Francis and his openness to LGBTQ+ people—a backlash that some fear might devolve into a schism in ...


Gay News

Bring Chicago Home: Guess who's saying no again 2023-12-04
Commentary by Bob Palmer and Mark Swartz - Chicago is ushering in an era of change with a new progressive mayor with a vision to invest in communities long ignored and a significant increase in like-minded city council members. We are excited to see ...


Gay News

Pope Francis's community of transwomen 2023-11-28
- It's a rare opportunity to meet the pope. It's even rarer if you're a transgender Catholic. However, on Nov. 19, in Torvaianica, Italy, a community of transwomen, many of them sex workers, were welcomed and seated ...


Gay News

Banning the Banning of Books: Illinois and California lead the way 2023-10-26
- In June, at the Harold Washington Library in Chicago, Governor JB Pritzker signed legislation banning book bans in Illinois public libraries. This legislation, initiated by Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias, passed the Illinois House and ...


Gay News

OPINION Renewing state's Invest in Kids program is investing in anti-LGBTQ+ hate 2023-10-23
- In February 2020, Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield warned transgender students in the Diocese's educational system that they "may be expelled from the school" if they live their lives authentically. Lansing Christian School ...


Gay News

Gilbert Baker Foundation reacts to death of shop owner who flew the rainbow flag 2023-08-29
--From a press release - In response to the murder of Laura Ann Carleton over flying the Rainbow flag in her shop in California, the Gilbert Baker Foundation released the statement below. Facebook refused to post the statement as it did not "...meet their standards." ...


Gay News

VIEWPOINT U.S. higher education under siege; freedom of inquiry and speech at risk 2023-07-03
- The Covid pandemic threw a harsh spotlight on higher education in America, exposing forces eating away at the foundations of college and university learning, calling into question the traditional purposes of such education in our post-modern, ...


Gay News

Guest essay by Florida mom Nicole Pejovich: What's Happening to Florida's Public Schools? 2023-06-19
Related video below - A queer Florida parent answers questions about recent laws, how Floridians are coping, and how you can help Books pulled from school library shelves by the dozens. All evidence of inclusivity stripped from classrooms. The politically ...


Gay News

VIEWPOINT For divorced parents, transgender children's health can present tricky dilemmas 2023-06-12
- Over the last few months, issues impacting individuals who identify as transgender and non-binary are getting a lot of attention in the media and among some politicians. Sadly, because it's become a political issue; a lot ...


Gay News

VIEWPOINT War in the 21st Century: mercenaries, private military companies, private armies 2023-05-20
- In 2022, $407 billion of the Pentagon budget—representing half of that year's funding —were obligated to private contractors, of which a significant number were Private Military Companies (PMCs) involved in ...


Gay News

VIEWPOINT Telling the world about my mental health disorders 2023-05-04
- Over the years, coming out as a lesbian hasn't been that hard for me—because I was always too busy hiding something else. Confessing queerness can be a breeze compared to revealing mental illness. But I decline ...


 


Copyright © 2024 Windy City Media Group. All rights reserved.
Reprint by permission only. PDFs for back issues are downloadable from
our online archives.

Return postage must accompany all manuscripts, drawings, and
photographs submitted if they are to be returned, and no
responsibility may be assumed for unsolicited materials.

All rights to letters, art and photos sent to Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago
Gay and Lesbian News and Feature Publication) will be treated
as unconditionally assigned for publication purposes and as such,
subject to editing and comment. The opinions expressed by the
columnists, cartoonists, letter writers, and commentators are
their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Nightspots
(Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay,
Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender News and Feature Publication).

The appearance of a name, image or photo of a person or group in
Nightspots (Chicago GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times
(a Chicago Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender News and Feature
Publication) does not indicate the sexual orientation of such
individuals or groups. While we encourage readers to support the
advertisers who make this newspaper possible, Nightspots (Chicago
GLBT Nightlife News) and Windy City Times (a Chicago Gay, Lesbian
News and Feature Publication) cannot accept responsibility for
any advertising claims or promotions.

 
 

TRENDINGBREAKINGPHOTOS







Sponsor
Sponsor


 



Donate


About WCMG      Contact Us      Online Front  Page      Windy City  Times      Nightspots
Identity      BLACKlines      En La Vida      Archives      Advanced Search     
Windy City Queercast      Queercast Archives     
Press  Releases      Join WCMG  Email List      Email Blast      Blogs     
Upcoming Events      Todays Events      Ongoing Events      Bar Guide      Community Groups      In Memoriam     
Privacy Policy     

Windy City Media Group publishes Windy City Times,
The Bi-Weekly Voice of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans Community.
5315 N. Clark St. #192, Chicago, IL 60640-2113 • PH (773) 871-7610 • FAX (773) 871-7609.